They agreed to put together a gigantic subsidy for a guy who won't show them any financials.
Well, thats true. But aside that "deal" as it exists (or should anyways) ,is arguably idiotic in its how its so tilted in favor of Katz, I dont know what they really did qwrong, or should have done differently.
Of course I know the pro Katz pom pom waivers will say they should have just asked him what he wanted,, said ok, & then started digging, but when you are talking about a half billion dollar inverstment, for a private enterprise, I dont think thats how the world should work. Call me crazy though.
Well, thats true. But aside that "deal" as it exists (or should anyways) ,is arguably idiotic in its how its so tilted in favor of Katz, I dont know what they really did qwrong, or should have done differently.
Of course I know the pro Katz pom pom waivers will say they should have just asked him what he wanted,, said ok, & then started digging, but when you are talking about a half billion dollar inverstment, for a private enterprise, I dont think thats how the world should work. Call me crazy though.
It's not about subsidizing Katz. It's about sustaining the Oilers in Edmonton for the long-term and revitalizing the downtown core.
In a league where 83% of income is generated by 3 franchises (Leafs, Habs, and Rangers) who are always finding ways to drive up player costs, a team in Edmonton can only be sustained with community assistance. Until the NHL institutes serious revenue sharing, new CBAs will just be band-aid solutions that are achieved at great cost (work stoppages).
Over the next 35 years there will be periods where Alberta economy will struggle and the Canadian dollar will fall (relative to the USD), count on it. When that happens the Oilers will bleed money.
Only a fool would sign a non-sweetheart 35 year arena deal in Edmonton.
It's not about subsidizing Katz. It's about sustaining the Oilers in Edmonton for the long-term and revitalizing the downtown core.
In a league where 83% of income is generated by 3 franchises (Leafs, Habs, and Rangers) who are always finding ways to drive up player costs, a team in Edmonton can only be sustained with community assistance. Until the NHL institutes serious revenue sharing, new CBAs will just be band-aid solutions that are achieved at great cost (work stoppages).
Over the next 35 years there will be periods where Alberta economy will struggle and the Canadian dollar will fall (relative to the USD), count on it. When that happens the Oilers will bleed money.
Only a fool would sign a non-sweetheart 35 year arena deal in Edmonton.
Hes got a sweetheart deal . He just wont sign it. And the question was posed is exactly how was the City an "idiot" in how they proceeded on this?
And just so Im clear on the argument, is the "pitch" that the deal should be that the Oilers make there 10's of millions in the good times, but are to be insulated from the bad times.
I worry about the Canadian dollar dropping in the next few years though, especially with news that American companies are tapping into shale reserves and being able to get oil/gas through the fracking process, it could mean the American economy rebounds strong in the next few years, leaving America with less need of any foreign oil period and a stronger dollar.
Economic conditions in Alberta can change very quickly, people who think it will always stay stable here need to study the last 30 years and what the Oilers have had to go through.
China.
The point is fair, but things will never be "bad". I would be willing to wager a lot of money that we never see the CAD below 90 cents USD in our lifetimes, for two reasons: first the diversification of the demand for oil amongst more economies now (reducing Canadian dependence on the US economy overall), and second (and more important), the USA has fallen from economic glory in a way they can never reverse. So even if the US economy does pick up, it can never be what it once was relative to countries like Canada. The barn doors of free trade are open and good luck closing them again.
Hes got a sweetheart deal . He just wont sign it. And the question was posed is exactly how was the City an "idiot" in how they proceeded on this?
And just so Im clear on the argument, is the "pitch" that the deal should be that the Oilers make there 10's of millions in the good times, but are to be insulated from the bad times.
It was a great deal for the city too, they were getting in effect a crown jewel center piece arena complex out of a science fiction movie for their decrypt downtown core with a can't-miss draw (the Oilers) attached to it, guaranteed to bring in 18,000+ on at least 41 nights a year in the dead of winter.
For the same price from their pockets as it would cost to renovate this piece of crap:
I don't know but it seems like there may have been some ambiguity from both sides on the prospect of a gaming license (which is why that's called a framework and not a done deal).
they are not taking the lead, though. they just watched 5 years of Edmonton mistakes and avoid them when starting their process.
pretty easy for them when they watch the idiots in edmonton for both katz group and the city. it's like a george constanza thing. they just do the opposite of what Edmonton's instincts are.
Maybe that's why they have a toilet for a football stadium?
It was a great deal for the city too, they were getting in effect a crown jewel center piece arena complex out of a science fiction movie for their decrypt downtown core with a can't-miss draw (the Oilers) attached to it, guaranteed to bring in 18,000+ on at least 41 nights a year in the dead of winter.
For the same price from their pockets as it would cost to renovate this piece of crap:
I don't know but it seems like there may have been some ambiguity from both sides on the prospect of a gaming license (which is why that's called a framework and not a done deal).
Im not so sure it was a "great" deal. For all intents & purposes, the City & the paying for every penny of it. But regardless, its important & perhaps needed for the City, I cant disagree with that.
My only point on all this (or on this one anyways) is I really dont know what the City could have done any different to make it go quicker & to get it done, other than to give the guy a blank cheque.
Its like people hate Northlands & say they are horrible operators. They cant articulate why, other than its obvious they are & were & are an indepidement to Katz making money.
Im not so sure it was a "great" deal. For all intents & purposes, the City & the paying for every penny of it. But regardless, its important & perhaps needed for the City, I cant disagree with that.
My only point on all this (or on this one anyways) is I really dont know what the City could have done any different to make it go quicker & to get it done, other than to give the guy a blank cheque.
Give the guy a gaming/casino license and be done with it. Lets get this freaking thing going.
A gaming license does not cost the tax payer directly. Ultimately, I don't care if Katz gets a sweet deal.
Heck, I want him to have a sweet deal, I don't want the Oilers to be subject to the whims of an Alberta economy that can topsy turvy every 10-12 years. This deal has to work for the Oilers not just for today but for whatever the future holds.
I don't know but it seems like there may have been some ambiguity from both sides on the prospect of a gaming license (which is why that's called a framework and not a done deal).
Give the guy a gaming/casino license and be done with it. Lets get this freaking thing going.
A gaming license does not cost the tax payer directly. Ultimately, I don't care if Katz gets a sweet deal.
Heck, I want him to have a sweet deal, I don't want the Oilers to be subject to the whims of an Alberta economy that can topsy turvy every 10-12 years. This deal has to work for the Oilers not just for today but for whatever the future holds.
Fat chance on the gaming license. Katz pissed that away with his idiotic campaign contributions.
I hope they'll be able to bridge the $6 million per annum difference in some other way (non-voting share sale, one time lottery, etc.). It would also be nice if the province would kick back some sports lottery money back to the Flames and Oilers for arena building purposes.
That's an easy thing to say when you're not the one being asked to sign a 35 year lease.
Katz has done a lot of things wrong during this negotiation but he is right to be leery of making a large, long term, financial commitment in a boom/bust city like Edmonton.
If what's happened with the Coyotes has shown us anything it's that those long term commitments arent worth a whole lot. The City of Glendale had a long term agreement with the Coyotes but when the economics didnt end up working out and the owner declared bankruptcy they were at risk of losing the team. Now they end up paying through the nose to keep the team despite the fact they already had a long term agreement. I'm fine without any 35 year "guarantee".
They didn't just ask for a $6 million/year blank cheque, I think what they were asking for was a gaming license.
I remember it also being thrown around when the frame work of the original deal was being bandied about.
You seem to remember nothing about what would be required to obtain a gaming licence in the province of Alberta, i.e. this being provincial domain and specifically that application would need to be made with AGLC and that Katz hasn't pursued this. Nor have you even considered that his political donation fiasco rules out his chances of obtaining such a license.
The Conservative Party may as well abdicate if they were stupid enough to allow such a licence to be granted to Katz at this point.
Fat chance on the gaming license. Katz pissed that away with his idiotic campaign contributions.
I hope they'll be able to bridge the $6 million per annum difference in some other way (non-voting share sale, one time lottery, etc.). It would also be nice if the province would kick back some sports lottery money back to the Flames and Oilers for arena building purposes.
I'd rather they gave him the gaming license. Doesn't impact me as a tax payer whereas some other ways to "bridge" that difference likely could.
If the Jets get casino dollars from the Manitoba gov't, I really don't give a crap if the Oilers get it too. Good for them.
I'd rather they gave him the gaming license. Doesn't impact me as a tax payer whereas some other ways to "bridge" that difference likely could.
If the Jets get casino dollars from the Manitoba gov't, I really don't give a crap if the Oilers get it too. Good for them.
It would unquestionably be the right move but it would also likely lead to the conservatives losing the next election. They won't do it in a million years.
I'd rather they gave him the gaming license. Doesn't impact me as a tax payer whereas some other ways to "bridge" that difference likely could.
If the Jets get casino dollars from the Manitoba gov't, I really don't give a crap if the Oilers get it too. Good for them.
That's not how it works. Weve been through all this before. Now he has been the subject of an investigation into campaign contributions. Which makes it even more unlikely that he will ever get a gaming license.
That's not how it works. Weve been through all this before. Now he has been the subject of an investigation into campaign contributions. Which makes it even more unlikely that he will ever get a gaming license.
It's not about subsidizing Katz. It's about sustaining the Oilers in Edmonton for the long-term and revitalizing the downtown core.
In a league where 83% of income is generated by 3 franchises (Leafs, Habs, and Rangers) who are always finding ways to drive up player costs, a team in Edmonton can only be sustained with community assistance. Until the NHL institutes serious revenue sharing, new CBAs will just be band-aid solutions that are achieved at great cost (work stoppages).
Over the next 35 years there will be periods where Alberta economy will struggle and the Canadian dollar will fall (relative to the USD), count on it. When that happens the Oilers will bleed money.
Only a fool would sign a non-sweetheart 35 year arena deal in Edmonton.
If NHL hockey in Edmonton is a charity, we dont want it.
If NHL hockey in Edmonton is a charity, we dont want it.
It would only be a charity if the benevolent billionaire decided to eat the losses (long-term) for you.
At a cost of $5-$15 a year in additional property taxes less the external benefit of injecting some life into the downtown? I doubt most Edmontonians share your view or at least they wouldn't share your view after living without an NHL team for a few years.
If I am wrong about that and people aren't willing to pay any additional taxes to keep the Oilers in Edmonton, we shouldn't have an NHL team.
The one thing I have wondered is why don't the Oilers and Flames BOTH go in on the scratch and win lottery games like they did about a decade ago? Maybe that could be a way of both teams making some arena money.
Give the guy a gaming/casino license and be done with it. Lets get this freaking thing going.
A gaming license does not cost the tax payer directly. Ultimately, I don't care if Katz gets a sweet deal.
Heck, I want him to have a sweet deal, I don't want the Oilers to be subject to the whims of an Alberta economy that can topsy turvy every 10-12 years. This deal has to work for the Oilers not just for today but for whatever the future holds.
Ah, I get it now. Just give him whatever he asks for. True enough, thats the ticket to get a new arena built.
Get er done Mande!
Ah, I get it now. Just give him whatever he asks for. True enough, thats the ticket to get a new arena built.
Get er done Mande!
Seriously? What is the issue with Katz getting a Casino License? I don't see the issue in it. And I have worked in that industry for a long period of time. Alberta is basically Vegas North. Did you know Alberta is the third largest gaming market in the world? If the Oilers can get a small piece of that pie (and the ownership side is the smallest end of that pie) and you could even load the deck as far as what charities he sees in his casino. Give all the local minor hockey charities the dates that have games scheduled at home.
That's the biggest thing here. People thing that in Alberta that opening a casino is just a blank cheque for the owner. But they get the smallest portion of the profits from the Casino. The government and the charities take more than what the owner gets, but because Katz wants to use his part of the money to subsidize the team, people are all up in arms.
And it's pretty common practice for casino owners to use their casino to prop up other business ventures. The company I used to work for started out running bingo halls, moved to a casino, purchased a couple of small operations at the time (GP and Fort Mac) and turned them both into solid money makers, and in turn used the money from those places to build the Deerfoot. So in reality, Edmontonians should be happy that Katz wants to keep the money in the City of Edmonton. Because I would imagine the funds from the Baccarat probably don't even go to business in this country, probably most of the money is filtered back to Asia.
It would only be a charity if the benevolent billionaire decided to eat the losses (long-term) for you.
At a cost of $5-$15 a year in additional property taxes less the external benefit of injecting some life into the downtown? I doubt most Edmontonians share your view or at least they wouldn't share your view after living without an NHL team for a few years.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Do you honestly claim to know what most Edmontonians think about raising their property taxes so that the Oilers owner can turn a profit?
Quote:
Originally Posted by worraps
If I am wrong about that and people aren't willing to pay any additional taxes to keep the Oilers in Edmonton, we shouldn't have an NHL team.
a) you're wrong about that.
b) you're wrong about who should and shouldn't have an NHL team.
The model is broken, not the fans willingness to pay. Already Oiler fans are paying for high priced tickets AND you think its right to demand that all Edmontonians, non Oiler fans as well to pay a tax to them?
The problem is that the NHL team financial model is broken - if a team needs the local citizenry to donate monies for the team to be financially solvent - then I suggest the problem isn't the citizenry. It's the team and the model.
Which is the crux of why there is a lockout. Can NHL owners be financially profitable longterm under the current CBA? Nope. And its not up to us (local city) to bail them out. I don't understand why that's so difficult to understand.
The one thing I have wondered is why don't the Oilers and Flames BOTH go in on the scratch and win lottery games like they did about a decade ago? Maybe that could be a way of both teams making some arena money.
Didn't that fail?
There was talk about going to single game betting, but apparently Daly doesn't like that as it could led to corruption. That and really how much more money is generated as opposed to just being shifted?
There was talk about going to single game betting, but apparently Daly doesn't like that as it could led to corruption. That and really how much more money is generated as opposed to just being shifted?
Yeah, it didn't really make the money it should have at the time, but I think it was also done poorly. There are many ways it could be done really. They could do one of those Full House lottery style things, they could try the scratchies again or they could maybe even group with the 'Nucks and Jets and see if there is something that WCLC wants to do, maybe start an actual lottery for the teams or something along those lines.
